Atmel AVR assembler
in [ASM]
|
Next: int 10h AX = 4F00h
From: William Meyer on 25 Jul 2005 19:09 Betov wrote: > "Randall Hyde" <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> ýcrivait > news:QgOEe.3092$0C.1369(a)newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net: > > >>assemblers like >>NASM, FASM, GoAsm, TASM, MASM, Gas/ATT, Gas/Intel, and HLA all have >>fairly decent followings (numbering in the thousands of users, each) > > > * HLA is not an Assembler... Your posts are generally offensive, and are certainly of no consequence in this particular discussion. I'm not (before you decide to flame me) a user of HLA, nor will I *ever* be a user of RosASM (whether it works or not), as I have seen all I wish to of your flaming, and will not subsidize it. If you've nothing of substance to contribute to the ongoing debate on what constitutes a "real" implementation of an X86 assembly language tool, I'm sure I am not alone in hoping you will merely observe. Bill
From: William Meyer on 25 Jul 2005 19:11 CBFalconer wrote: > > What he could do, without raising hackles everywhere, is write a > set of macros for m4 to process his version of assembly language > into the generally accepted source. m4 is generally known, and > available. And it would be a much more responsible approach to the issue than running off into left field and inventing an "improved" syntax. Bill
From: William Meyer on 25 Jul 2005 19:34 Paul Marciano wrote: > > I've also written Z80, 6509, 6809, ARM, PIC, 8501, 80x86 and PowerPC. > They all have unique qualities and assembly format. And none of them particularly difficult to learn. > I can see the appeal of wanting a prettier assembly language for AVR > than the standard one. I think it's great that you've taken it on, and > if you enjoy working with it then that's marvellous. > > > But if this is for a work project, don't use it. Use the standard > syntax. Regardless of your sense of aesthetics, you would be a POOR > ENGINEER if you impose a non-standard language on your company. Sooner > or later someone may have to support your work and you would be > creating a barrier for them. Very well said. > It's simply not your place to declare, in a professional environment, > that the standard used by all AVR programmers is "unclean" and > unilaterally implement something else. And again. For any commercial work, it's unprofessional to overlook the likelihood that someone other than yourself may have to perform maintenance. > For your own personal hobby, it's great - do whatever is easier for > you. Be happy. Share you work, as you're doing. > > For work, you're being paid as a professional engineer. Behave like > one. Perfect summation! Bill
From: ?a/b on 26 Jul 2005 03:05 On 25 Jul 2005 13:52:34 -0700, "Paul Marciano" <pm940(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >Herbert Kleebauer wrote: >> Have to write some AVR code and therefore have read the >> AVR Instruction Set manual and tried the assembler included >> in AVR studio. I think the used syntax is completely >> unusable, so I decided to write my own assembler. > >I've written ten of thousands of lines of 68K assembler in my time. I >think it's a very easy to use instruction set format. so what have you written? "ten of thousands of lines of 68K assembler" of what? An operative system or other? >I've also written Z80, 6509, 6809, ARM, PIC, 8501, 80x86 and PowerPC. >They all have unique qualities and assembly format. > >I can see the appeal of wanting a prettier assembly language for AVR >than the standard one. I think it's great that you've taken it on, and >if you enjoy working with it then that's marvellous. > > >But if this is for a work project, don't use it. Use the standard >syntax. Regardless of your sense of aesthetics, you would be a POOR >ENGINEER if you impose a non-standard language on your company. Sooner >or later someone may have to support your work and you would be >creating a barrier for them. > >It's simply not your place to declare, in a professional environment, >that the standard used by all AVR programmers is "unclean" and >unilaterally implement something else. > > >For your own personal hobby, it's great - do whatever is easier for >you. Be happy. Share you work, as you're doing. > >For work, you're being paid as a professional engineer. Behave like >one. > > >Regards, >Paul.
From: Betov on 26 Jul 2005 04:32
William Meyer <wmeyer(a)sbcglobal.net> ýcrivait news:ZieFe.450$kk6.139 @newssvr13.news.prodigy.com: > If you've nothing of substance to contribute to the ongoing debate on > what constitutes a "real" implementation of an X86 assembly language > tool, I'm sure I am not alone in hoping you will merely observe. If someone can translate this strange sentence in english... Thanks in advance. Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |